Research-to-Essay Skill

Systematic workflow for producing publication-grade essays from research. Handles multi-source synthesis, narrative construction, voice calibration, and citation management.

Core Workflow

1. Intake & Planning

Parse user request to determine:

• Format target: Substack (1500-3000w), LinkedIn (150-300w), Academic (3000-8000w), or Executive Brief (500-1000w)
• Topic & angle: What question/claim is central?
• Essay structure: Which arc fits? (Persuasive, Exploratory, Diagnostic, Narrative-Conceptual, Synthesis)
  • Consult references/essay-structures.md for detailed arc patterns
• Voice profile: Which register? (Poetic Rigor, Professional Signal, Scholarly Precision, Surgical Clarity)
  • Consult references/voice-profiles.md for characteristics and forbidden patterns

Output from this phase: Research plan with target structure and voice

---

2. Research Execution

Conduct systematic research following source credibility hierarchy:

Search strategy:

• Start with primary sources (research papers, official data, technical documentation)
• Layer in expert analysis (domain specialists, academic reviews, investigative journalism)
• Add informed commentary (practitioner Substacks, conference talks) for applied context
• Avoid weak sources (social media speculation, content marketing, AI-generated farms)

Source quality requirements:

• Minimum 5-8 sources for persuasive essays
• Minimum 8-12 sources for exploratory essays
• Minimum 6-10 sources for diagnostic essays
• Always include strongest counter-argument sources
• Prioritize recent sources for rapidly-changing topics, foundational sources for stable concepts

Citation extraction:

• Record: title, URL, author, date, credibility tier (1-4), key claims
• Use web_fetch to read full articles when web_search snippets insufficient
• For each source, extract 3-5 core claims explicitly
• Tag sources with themes for clustering

Consult references/research-patterns.md for:

• Source credibility hierarchy (Tiers 1-4)
• Research strategy by essay type
• Quality checks and anti-patterns

---

3. Synthesis

Organize research into thematic structure using one of two methods:

Method A: Manual thematic clustering (for simpler essays)

• Group claims by theme, not by source
• Identify convergent claims (multiple sources agree) → high confidence
• Identify divergent claims (sources disagree) → flag as tension
• Map claim dependencies (which claims require which others)

Method B: Script-assisted synthesis (for complex multi-source essays)

• Create JSON file with sources in required format (see script usage below)
• Run scripts/synthesize_sources.py <sources.json> <output.md>
• Review generated synthesis report showing themes, convergence, tensions

Script format:

[
  {
    "title": "Source Title",
    "url": "https://example.com",
    "source_type": "primary",
    "claims": ["Claim 1", "Claim 2"],
    "themes": ["theme1", "theme2"],
    "date": "2025-01-15",
    "credibility_tier": 1
  }
]

Synthesis output: Thematic map showing:

• Core themes with supporting sources
• Convergent evidence (agreement across sources)
• Divergent claims (tensions or debates)
• Gaps or under-supported areas

---

4. Drafting

Build essay iteratively using chosen structure template:

Template selection:

• Use assets/essay-template.md for Substack/long-form
• Use assets/linkedin-template.md for LinkedIn posts
• Adapt templates based on selected essay structure from Step 1

Drafting principles:

• Lead with strongest material: Hook in first paragraph, no throat-clearing
• Integrate sources naturally: Embed citations in argument flow, don't list separately
• Section logic: Each section should build necessarily on the previous
• Evidence before abstraction: Concrete examples, then pattern extraction
• Tension acknowledgment: Include counter-arguments and complications honestly
• Progressive depth: Can write full essay in one pass OR build iteratively:
  • Pass 1: Outline with section headers
  • Pass 2: Fill core argument sections
  • Pass 3: Add evidence and citations
  • Pass 4: Write intro/conclusion last

Voice application:

• Apply selected voice profile consistently (from Step 1)
• Check against forbidden patterns in references/voice-profiles.md
• Calibrate tone dimensions: warmth, certainty, abstraction, humor

Citation style:

• Substack/LinkedIn: Inline hyperlinks on key phrases, footnotes for tangential details
• Academic: Numbered footnotes/endnotes with full bibliography
• Executive: Minimal citation, only for key data points
• Always cite: empirical claims, direct quotes, novel frameworks, counter-intuitive findings
• Never cite: common knowledge, your own synthesis, widely-known facts

---

5. Refinement

Quality assurance checks before delivery:

Structural review:

• Hook is genuinely compelling (test: would you click "read more"?)
• Stakes are established early (why should reader care?)
• Each section advances the argument necessarily
• Conclusion reframes rather than summarizes
• Length appropriate to format (Substack: 1500-3000w, LinkedIn: 150-300w)

Voice & style check:

• Run prose-polish skill on draft
• Check for forbidden patterns in selected voice profile
• Verify tone consistency throughout
• Confirm readability for target audience

Evidence & citation check:

• Every major claim has warrant (evidence or citation)
• Primary sources used for factual claims
• Counter-arguments acknowledged with credible sources
• No citation decay (secondary sources when primary available)
• Links functional, citations complete

Platform-specific polish:

• LinkedIn: Paragraph breaks every 2-3 sentences, key phrases bolded, CTA included
• Substack: Section transitions smooth, footnotes formatted, metadata complete
• Academic: All citations complete, methodology transparent, limitations noted

---

6. Delivery

Present final essay as artifact with metadata:

Include:

• Complete essay in appropriate markdown format
• Word count and target audience notation
• Source list with tiers noted
• Key frameworks or concepts referenced
• Research date and any time-sensitivity notes

Optional additions based on context:

• Alternative versions for different platforms (e.g., Substack long-form + LinkedIn teaser)
• "Further Reading" section organized by theme
• Open questions or research gaps identified
• Suggested images or visual elements

---

When to Use References

Load these files as needed:

• references/voice-profiles.md — When clarifying voice characteristics or checking against forbidden patterns
• references/essay-structures.md — When uncertain about narrative arc or need structure template
• references/research-patterns.md — When evaluating source quality, planning research strategy, or checking synthesis methodology

Load scripts when:

• scripts/synthesize_sources.py — When dealing with 8+ sources requiring systematic thematic clustering

---

Quality Signals

High-quality output:

• Opens with genuine insight, not preamble
• Every paragraph necessary, no filler
• Sources integrated into argument, not appended
• Counter-arguments acknowledged, not buried
• Conclusion offers new lens, not recap
• Voice consistent and appropriate to format
• Citations complete and properly tiered
• Length justified by complexity, not padding

Red flags:

• Generic opening ("In today's world...")
• List structure when narrative needed
• No acknowledgment of complexity or tradeoffs
• All sources from same perspective
• Summary conclusion
• Inconsistent tone or register shifts
• Weak or missing citations for key claims
• Excessive length without proportional depth

---

Iteration Protocol

After delivering draft, typical refinement requests:

• "Make this more [voice]" → Reload references/voice-profiles.md and adjust tone calibration
• "Add more evidence for X" → Return to research phase for specific claim
• "This section feels weak" → Restructure using references/essay-structures.md patterns
• "Too long / too short" → Audit for filler vs. density, adjust scope
• "Challenge this argument" → Load strongest counter-sources, revise tensions section

---

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

• Don't search once and write—iterate research based on draft gaps
• Don't list sources separately from argument—integrate naturally
• Don't write intro first—write it last after you know what you said
• Don't ignore voice profile constraints—they prevent AI slop
• Don't cite weak sources when primary available—tier matters
• Don't pad length artificially—every paragraph must earn its keep
• Don't summarize in conclusion—reframe or extrapolate instead